Cycle Consistency as Reward: Learning Image-Text Alignment without Human Preferences
About
Measuring alignment between language and vision is a fundamental challenge, especially as multimodal data becomes increasingly detailed and complex. Existing methods often rely on collecting human or AI preferences, which can be costly and time-intensive. We propose an alternative approach that leverages cycle consistency as a supervisory signal. Given an image and generated text, we map the text back to image space using a text-to-image model and compute the similarity between the original image and its reconstruction. Analogously, for text-to-image generation, we measure the textual similarity between an input caption and its reconstruction through the cycle. We use the cycle consistency score to rank candidates and construct a preference dataset of 866K comparison pairs. The reward model trained on our dataset, CycleReward, outperforms state-of-the-art alignment metrics on detailed captioning, with superior inference-time scalability when used as a verifier for Best-of-N sampling, while maintaining speed and differentiability. Furthermore, performing DPO and Diffusion DPO using our dataset enhances performance across a wide range of vision-language tasks and text-to-image generation. Our dataset, model, and code are publicly released at https://cyclereward.github.io.
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hallucination Evaluation | AMBER | -- | 267 | |
| Hallucination Evaluation | MMHal | Score3.95 | 62 | |
| Image-to-Text Hallucination Evaluation | COCO | CHAIRs Score0.13 | 18 | |
| Image+Text-to-Text Hallucination Evaluation | MMHal-Bench | BERT Score77.7 | 18 | |
| Preference Assessment | PickaPic general preference assessment (real-user interaction) | Assessment Accuracy62.6 | 18 | |
| Preference Assessment | PreferImg MP 1.0 (seen) | Assessment Accuracy50.8 | 18 | |
| Preference Assessment | PreferImg SP 1.0 (unseen) | Assessment Accuracy50 | 18 | |
| Preference Assessment | PreferImg MP 1.0 (unseen) | Assessment Accuracy56 | 18 | |
| Preference Assessment | PreferImg SP 1.0 (seen) | Assessment Accuracy48 | 18 | |
| Image Captioning | CAPability | Average Score70.59 | 12 |